1 2025:CGHC:31196 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR TPC No. 197 of 2024 1 - Smt Dipika Thakur W/o Lalit Singh Bisen Aged About 28 Years D/o Rajendra Singh Thakur, R/o House No. 130/ K, Ward No. 42, Kasaridih, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Lalit Singh Bisen S/o Shambhu Singh Bisen Aged About 32 Years R/o Near Gopi Cycle Store, Kududand, Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause title, as taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Sanjay Pathak, Advocate. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order On Board 08/07/2025 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner/wife has filed the instant petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’), 1908 for transfer of Civil Suit No. CS/778/2024 (Lalit Singh Bisen versus Smt. Dipika Thakur) pending before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) to the learned Family Court, Durg, District Durg (CG). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/wife would submit that marriage of petitioner/wife was solemnized with the respondent/husband on RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2025.07.09 17:08:58 +0530 2 16.02.2023 as per the Hindu customs and rituals. But, due to dispute arose between the parties, the petitioner/wife was compelled to live apart and she is presently residing along with her parents at Durg. He would further submit that respondent/husband has filed divorce petition bearing Civil Suit No. CS/778/2024 before the Family Court, Bilaspur, whereas petitioner/wife has filed maintenance application before the Family Court, Durg and one another case bearing MJC No.925/2024 under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is also pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durg against the respondent/husband. Learned counsel further submitted that distance between Durg and Bilaspur is about 170 km and being a lady, it would be difficult for her to travel such long distance, whereas if divorce petition is transferred from Bilaspur to Durg, then it would be convenient for respondent /husband also as he has already come to Durg to attend hearing in aforesaid two cases, therefore, it is prayed that application may be allowed and Civil Suit No. CS/778/2024 (divorce petition) filed by respondent/husband be transferred from the Family Court, Bilaspur (CG) to the Family Court, Durg (CG). 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to allow the aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record carefully. 6. Having considered the fact that, to and fro distance between Durg and Bilaspur is about 340 km, as such, being a lady it would be difficult for the petitioner/wife to attend hearing in divorce petition at Family Court, Bilaspur, further, two cases are already pending against the respondent/husband before the Family Court, Durg, therefore if civil suit 3 (divorce petition) filed by respondent/husband is transferred from the Family Court, Bilaspur to the Family Court, Durg, then it would be convenient for respondent also to attend hearing at the same place in aforesaid cases. 7. Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 held at para 9 which reads as under:- "9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.” 8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sumita Singh Versus Kumar Sanjay and another reported in 2001 10 SCC 41 has observed that if husband files suit against wife, then convenience of wife must be looked into. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Versus Kishore Babulal Pardeshi reported in (2005) 12 SCC 237 has observed that the convenience of wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband. 9. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, as discussed in preceding paragraphs and further considering the aforecited case laws, wherein it has been observed that, in transfer of matrimonial cases, the wife's convenience must be looked into, in the considered opinion of this Court, 4 it is a fit case for transfer of the civil suit, as prayed for. 10. Consequently, the instant transfer petition is allowed. It is ordered that the Civil Suit No. CS/778/2024 (Lalit Singh Bisen versus Smt. Dipika Thakur) pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) be transferred to the Family Court, Durg, District Durg (CG) for its trial/disposal in accordance with law. 11. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) is directed to transmit the record of the aforesaid Civil Suit No. CS/778/2024 to the Family Court, Durg, District Durg (CG), within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt/submission of a copy of this order. It is further observed that after receiving the case on transfer, the transferred Court is directed to consider and decide the case as early as possible, preferably within a further period of four months from the date of receipt of the record from the transferring Court. 12. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Rukhsar